1. Field of Invention
The present invention relates to interlocking building blocks for the construction of a building or wall structure.
It is common construction practice to erect building walls, as well as certain categories of free-standing walls, using concrete blocks of a solid rectangular configuration in which each block exhibits a plurality of cavities and external planes at all six sides thereof. Such blocks are, as is well known, laid-up in courses, typically by placing mortar, by trowel, on the top of the blocks and then positioning the blocks of the next course upon the lower course. However, as described below, some systems of interlocking blocks exist which reduce or eliminate the need for such mortar. The instant invention particularly addresses the need for building blocks useful components of an interlocking building block system capable of resisting high lateral loads, of a both uniform and cyclical nature.
2. Description of the Prior Art
The prior art has recognized the need for, and value of, a building block system having interlocking elements at the horizontal interface between courses of the building blocks. The rationale for the use of such interlocking between horizontal planes of building blocks has, typically, been to eliminate or minimize the need for mortar between the courses thereof.
Such structures and systems appear in the prior art as U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,186,540 (1980) to Mullins, entitled Interlocking Cementitious Building Blocks and No. 3,325,956 (1967) to Moraetes, entitled Key Element for Concrete Blocks.
All building blocks of the instant type include a solid volume, also known as a web, which separate two vertical cavities. In the instant invention, this solid volume or web narrows in the negative (downward vertical) direction. No such narrowing of the web or partition exists in the reference to Mullins. Rather, it is only the upper mouth, known as a corbel, which slopes in a negative z-direction. More particularly, the teaching of Mullins is limited to that of a shape of the mouth of the vertical cavities which assists in the removal of retractable cores therefrom after the molding of such a block has occurred. Accordingly, to the extent that any narrowing of the web or partition Mullins occurs in the negative direction, such narrowing plays no role in the functionality of any wall system formed of blocks thereof.
With respect to Moraetes cited above, the teaching thereof is that of core openings which are tapered to permit ready extraction of the cores of molds thereof during manufacture of the block. That is, the vertical cavities of Moraetes do not bear any particular relationship to the structure of the webs or partition separating the vertical cavities thereof. Rather, the teaching of Moraetes relates only to its use of so-called key sections, which use is facilitated by the core openings shown therein. As such, the system of Moraetes is one is which a separate key or lock element, having completely different mechanical principles from that of Applicant's system, is used to achieve some of the objectives of vertical and horizontal stability set forth herein. It is therefore to be appreciated that a system of the type of Applicant's cannot be achieved by Moraetes, either alone or in combination with any other art known to the within inventor. Further, the art of record does not suggest the particular location of the interior cavity ledges of the component block structure of this invention. Without the particular geometry of the ledge structure of the vertical cavity walls of the inventor's constructional components it is not possible to achieve wall structures which are structural or functional equivalents of those that can be constructed with inventor's constructional components, this as is more particularly set forth below.
The inventor is also aware of United Kingdom Patent No. 550,745 (1941) to Rigby which teaches a proportionality of interlock elements which is completely different from that of the present invention. More particularly, Rigby, as is the case in essentially all prior art known to the inventor, is lacking in the deep key interlock features of the invention which are set forth herein.
It is further noted that none of the above prior art addresses or suggests the need or value of a building block interlock structure between the vertical surfaces of building blocks within courses or rows, apparently because of a lack of recognition of the need for structures that could provide resistance against unusual lateral loads that might be encountered by a wall structure formed of building blocks. However, the extent to which the forces of nature can impact upon the integrity of apparently massive structures, such as building blocks/masonry wall structures, as been long know to architects and structural engineers that have been active in geographical areas prone to high velocity winds and earthquakes. High lateral loads may, as well, result from the horizontal component of truss-type loading upon a wall which is in truss-like communication with roof-beams and other transverse members of a given mechanical system.
The instant invention, accordingly, addresses the long-felt need in the art for a constructional component adapted for use in a wall system capable of resisting such high lateral loads, regardless of the origin thereof.